Delgado v. Griffin
- Edgardo Ramos
- 1:16-cv-01313
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 4
In Delgado v. Griffin, Judge Ramos denied Delgado’s habeas petition after adopting an unobjected-to report and recommendation.
David Delgado’s federal challenge to his New York manslaughter conviction and sentence was denied; the respondent and state judgment were left undisturbed.
What happened
In Delgado v. Griffin, David Delgado challenged his New York conviction and sentence, arguing that his trial lawyer was ineffective and that he was denied help from a medical expert. He also argued that the trial court should have instructed the jury about intoxication.
A magistrate judge recommended denying the petition. Delgado received extra time to object but filed no objections, so the court reviewed the recommendation for clear error and found none.
Judge Edgardo Ramos adopted the recommendation in full and denied the petition. The court directed the clerk to enter judgment and close the case, denied a certificate allowing an appeal, and denied permission to proceed without paying fees for any appeal.
The detailed version
- Delgado v. Griffin · No. 1:16-cv-01313
- Edgardo Ramos
- Sept. 25, 2020
Background
David Delgado, proceeding without a lawyer, filed a petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 challenging his conviction for first-degree manslaughter under New York law. He was serving a 20-year prison term followed by five years of post-release supervision after his sentence was reduced on appeal.
Delgado’s claims concerned his trial lawyer’s performance and the denial of a medical expert. He also had argued on direct appeal that the trial court should have instructed the jury about intoxication because he had consumed alcohol and medications on the night of the incident. The state appellate court affirmed his conviction but reduced his sentence in the interest of justice. A state trial court later denied his motion to vacate the conviction, finding that his claims were procedurally barred because they could have been raised on direct appeal.
Report and recommendation
The district court referred the federal petition to Magistrate Judge Debra C. Freeman. The respondent argued that Delgado’s claims were procedurally barred and, alternatively, lacked merit. Judge Freeman later recommended denying the petition in its entirety.
Delgado requested more time to object to the recommendation, and the court granted him a 30-day extension. His objections were due July 30, 2020. He filed no objections and made no further request for an extension. The court therefore concluded that he had waived the right to object and to obtain appellate review of the recommendation.
Ruling
Judge Edgardo Ramos reviewed Judge Freeman’s report despite the lack of objections and found no clear error. The order does not independently analyze the underlying habeas claims; it adopts the report in its entirety.
The court denied Delgado’s habeas petition, directed the clerk to enter judgment and close the case, and declined to issue a certificate of appealability because Delgado had not made a substantial showing that a constitutional right was denied. The court also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to proceed without paying fees for purposes of an appeal.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.